Porter County plan commission approves 11 design waivers for five‑lot subdivision on 53‑acre farm

The Porter County Plan Commission voted unanimously to approve 11 design waivers for case DW2025‑23, clearing the way for petitioners to prepare a primary plat for a five‑lot subdivision of roughly 53 acres on the south side of 1000 North.

The petitioners sought relief from standards in the county—s Unified Development Ordinance covering interior roads, sidewalks, street lighting, open space calculations, perimeter landscaping, drainage/watershed study requirements and other items that would normally apply to a major subdivision. Todd Leeson, attorney for the petitioners, told the commission the family farm—s history and prior parcel transfers mean the proposal must follow major‑subdivision rules and that the petitioners were asking to apply a lighter, minor‑subdivision approach in several respects.

Why it matters: The waivers do not itself finalize a subdivision; they instruct the petitioners and their engineers which UDO standards to follow when filing a primary plat. Commission approval narrows the technical requirements the petitioners will need to meet at the development‑review stage and reduces upfront engineering costs the petitioners said could be substantial if a full watershed study were required.

Leeson said the parcel is irregularly shaped, contains a wetlands area that removes a portion of the acreage from development, and includes an existing pipeline easement that complicates internal streets. "We're not asking not to do a drainage study," he told the commission. "We're just saying we don't wanna have to study the entire watershed." He described proposed homes sited near County Road 1000 North, with soil borings shown on the submitted primary plat for septic placement.

Nearby residents spoke against the waivers, citing drainage and character concerns. Eric Greer, who lives south of the property, said he worries runoff from new home sites will affect his land and that the neighborhood chose rural lots to avoid subdivisions: "We don't want a subdivision where we live." Another resident, Eric Lisonbee, expressed concern about property‑tax increases tied to new development.

Planning staff told the commission that, absent the earlier parcel splits the owners completed, the property likely could have qualified for an administrative or minor subdivision; prior transfers now require the major‑subdivision pathway. Commissioners who spoke in support noted the 10‑acre‑plus lot sizes and the pipeline and wetland constraints as reasons the requested waivers were reasonable for the rural context. One commissioner summarized the compromise as preserving the rural landscape while allowing the family to subdivide.

Action and vote: A motion to approve all 11 design waivers carried on a recorded voice vote. The record shows the commission voting as follows: Kevin Bridal, yes; Bob Gilliam, yes; Pamela Michler Fish, yes; Redstone, yes; Luther Williams, yes; Rick Burney, yes. Outcome: approved. The approval authorizes the waivers only; petitioners must still submit and obtain approval of the primary plat and any required engineering, septic, drainage and wetland permits.

Clarifying details from the hearing: the parcel area is approximately 53 acres; the proposed primary plat divides that acreage into five lots; the property has about 340 feet of frontage along County Road 1000 North for the eastern three lots; a wetlands area occupies a portion of the southern end; a pipeline (described in the record as a petroleum pipeline and large easement) crosses the site; petitioners requested relief from 11 specific UDO standards listed by staff. Staff said the proposed homes would be sited near the county road and that soil borings on the plat indicate intended septic locations.

What happens next: Petitioners must submit the primary plat and required technical studies (septic design, drainage calculations limited to the development area as allowed by the waivers) for development review and any required county and state permits. The commission noted that wetlands and pipeline setbacks will be addressed at the subsequent review stage.